背景:以前评估放射学研究体积的研究很少考虑相应的图像数量。我们旨在量化三级医疗保健网络中每位放射科医生的研究和图像数量的增加,以更好地了解对成像服务的需求。
方法:使用图片存档和通信系统(PACS),每个研究的图像数量是由墨尔本三级医疗保健网络的内部放射科医生报告的所有诊断研究获得的,澳大利亚,2009年1月至2022年12月。工资数据用于获得全职等效放射科医师的人数。
结果:在所有模式中,有4,462,702项诊断研究和1,116,311,209张图像。在研究期间,每月研究的数量从17,235增加到35,152(104%)。每月图像数量从1,120,832增加到13,353,056(1091%),计算机断层扫描(CT)显示每月9,395,653张图像的最大绝对增加(1476%)。每位全职同等放射科医生的每月研究没有增加;然而,每个放射科医生每月的图像切片数量增加了399%,从48,781到243,518(KendallTau相关系数0.830,P值<0.0001)。
结论:从2009年到2022年,每位放射科医师每月的图像数量大幅增加,尽管每位放射科医师每月的研究数量相对恒定。我们的研究表明,使用研究的数量作为一个孤立的基本数据集低估了真正的放射科医生的工作量。我们建议,单个放射科医生检查的图像数量增加可能更适当地反映真实的工作需求,并可能为未来的劳动力计划增加更多的权重。
BACKGROUND: Previous studies assessing the volume of radiological studies rarely considered the corresponding number of images. We aimed to quantify the increases in
study and image numbers per radiologist in a tertiary healthcare network to better understand the demands on imaging services.
METHODS: Using the Picture Archiving and Communication System (PACS), the number of images per
study was obtained for all diagnostic studies reported by in-house radiologists at a tertiary healthcare network in Melbourne, Australia, between January 2009 and December 2022. Payroll data was used to obtain the numbers of full-time equivalent radiologists.
RESULTS: Across all modalities, there were 4,462,702 diagnostic studies and 1,116,311,209 images. The number of monthly studies increased from 17,235 to 35,152 (104%) over the
study period. The number of monthly images increased from 1,120,832 to 13,353,056 (1091%), with computed tomography (CT) showing the greatest absolute increase of 9,395,653 images per month (1476%). There was no increase in the monthly studies per full-time equivalent radiologist; however, the number of monthly image slices per radiologist increased 399%, from 48,781 to 243,518 (Kendall Tau correlation coefficient 0.830, P-value < 0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS: The number of monthly images per radiologist increased substantially from 2009 to 2022, despite a relatively constant number of monthly studies per radiologist. Our
study suggests that using the number of studies as an isolated fundamental data set underestimates the true radiologist\'s workload. We propose that the increased volume of images examined by individual radiologists may more appropriately reflect true work demand and may add more weight to future workforce planning.